Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
No, I meant "we" as in anarchists. I'm an anarchist who is fine with the notion of private property.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.The only group that I know of which is fine with private property and call themselves anarchist are anarcho-capitalists, but all they share with anarchism is an opposition to the state. Every other form of anarchism has opposed private property, and capitalism in addition to the state. Anarcho-capitalism is as anarchist as the belief in the god of Abraham without the belief in the divinity of Jesus is christian. Anarchism is and has always been more than the opposition to the state.
Umm, a kibbutz-style anarcho-syndicalist society could handle private property just fine.
The reason I tired of anarchist tangents in threads that aren't the dedicated anarchism threads (aside from them being off topic) is because I get tired of the "not anarchist enough" arguments. I have a position that finds the nation-state model intrinsically flawed. I look for extrapolitical solutions to problems and possible replacements to the nation-state as a system of organizing society. I reject exclusive access to a political homeland, unquestioning support of any monopoly on force, and patriotism as a justification for anything. How much more anarchist do I need to be, seriously? It descends into arguing pointless semantics. If using the term "anarchist" to describe those positions is inaccurate, why? And do those reasons have to do with wanting to clarify distinctions between positions, or with wanting to keep a label "pure"?
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Grover Norquist accosted on street
Senator McConnell will block gun bill until Dem leaders give details
Obama: Gun control push 'isn't about me'
EPA vows better records management amid criticism
700 Special Ops Veterans Submit Letter To Congress Requesting Benghazi Investigation
Schwarzenegger: Federal climate report a ‘wake-up call’
edited 8th Apr '13 11:15:29 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016![]()
Yep. The military's been known to use that to give officers and some NCOs (particularly ones that are liked by their higher-ups) the Catholic priest treatment when they're accused of/convicted of/is sure to be convicted of rape. Which is to say that they're silently acquitted by someone higher up and reassigned to another unit.
edited 9th Apr '13 1:13:06 AM by Balmung
Bobby Jindal fails to sell a GOP budget and tax policy in Louisiana, has abysmal polling results.
Alaska GOP chairwoman locks down GOP headquarters in Alaska, either to protect the headquarters from the...Alaska GOP, or her career from...well, also the Alaska GOP.
I swear that is an actual news story I did not invent.
This is the state party that nominated Sarah Palin for governor, in a state that elected her. They have very deep problems.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Yeah, the GOP thing.
New York politics, especially at the state level is the stuff of spy novels. Hell, you should follow the latest scandal in which a corrupt Bronx councilman turned rat and launched a sting that's since collared four more politicians.
Like I said, I stopped comparing them to the KGB because at least the Soviets had something akin to a sense of personal honor.
Exactly.
edited 9th Apr '13 1:10:08 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorDude, no way. New York City politicians are bumbling fools and megalomaniacal asshats. They blow money on suspect public projects, give themselves powers they made up on the spot, and practice rank cronyism.
But New York State politicians.....hoo boy. NYS politicians have no sense of shame or of mortality. They believe they can do anything and nobody will say anything. They feel answerable to no one and will wreck your shit if you dare dissent. In that regard, they are very much like the Sturmabteilung.
It was an honor

I don't think describing us as socialist is accurate. We're far more socialistic than the average in America but we have a decent amount of people that don't adhere to that.